[dns-operations] Anycast vs. unicast NS

Bill Woodcock woody at pch.net
Sun Mar 20 20:03:13 UTC 2011

Hash: SHA1

On Mar 20, 2011, at 12:21 PM, Jim Reid wrote:
> Extra complexity in server configuration
> More complicated systems & network management (procedures)
> More complicated monitoring arrangements
> More elaborate network operations and support (procedures)

Aren't all of these differences dependent on the number of servers, rather than whether they're anycast or unicast?  I'd argue, actually, that these are all valid arguments against large unicast server networks, that hold _less_ true of similarly-sized anycast networks.  After all, unicast servers each have to be uniquely configured and have unique routing and be managed, to some degree, individually.  None of that is true of anycast server clouds.

I think you're just arguing against having multiple servers, not against anycast.

> Extra complexity in router setups
> "Special" filtering/peering treatment for anycast ASNs and prefixes

I disagree with these two.  Routers don't need special configuration to deal with anycast, because they don't know the difference between anycast and unicast.  Therefore, no additional complexity on that front, nor any special treatment.


Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (Darwin)


More information about the dns-operations mailing list